Evaluation of justice in climate policy

Abstract

<p>Climate policy justice aspects have become central to the societal debate regarding climate policy. Securing <span>climate policy justice has also been identified as an objective in Finland’s new Climate Act. The justice impacts </span><span>of climate policy measures must therefore be evaluated when formulating climate change policy plans and when </span><span>monitoring their implementation. The Finnish Climate Change Panel’s Climate Policy Justice project aims to </span><span>increase awareness regarding justice in climate policy. This report examines how climate policy justice can be </span><span>evaluated. To develop this evaluation work, the report presents a selection of questions for evaluating justice </span><span>impacts. </span></p><p><span>Fundamental and human rights present a basis on which climate policy justice evaluation is built upon. The </span><span>rights to life and health of current and future generations require the mitigation of and adaptation to climate </span><span>change. The starting point of this report is that justice cannot occur without climate policy. At best, climate policy </span><span>can be used to mend the injustices incurred by fossil fuel economies. Climate policy justice evaluations are </span><span>needed to ensure that climate policy does not create new injustices, especially without compensating them in </span><span>one way or another. However, climate policy alone cannot solve all questions of justice, and broader policy </span><span>mixes must therefore be considered. </span></p><p>The report structures climate policy justice through three justice dimensions derived from the research literature: <span>distributive, recognition, procedural justice. Distributive justice examines how the benefits and disadvantages </span><span>of climate policy measures are distributed. Questions of restorative justice are also examined as a sub-theme </span><span>of distributive justice. This sub-theme relates to the compensation of realized disadvantages or to the mitigation </span><span>of detrimental effects. The ways in which distributive justice impacts influence various spatial scales from local </span><span>to global requires scrutiny. Recognition justice focuses on how the various societal positions of individuals and </span><span>sociocultural factors affect the spread of climate policy consequences. Procedural justice is used to examine </span><span>the fairness of various policymaking phases. Considering different factors that increase vulnerability and groups </span><span>that are central specifically to climate policy, such as future generations and the Saami, are important aspects </span><span>of recognition and procedural justice. </span></p><p>Based on the abovementioned justice dimensions, this report presents a selection of evaluation questions that <span>can be used to develop the evaluation of climate policy justice impacts. These evaluation questions offer the </span><span>opportunity to comprehensively construe the justice impacts of Finnish climate policy. However, the justice </span><span>dimensions are overlapping, and separating them from one another is not always pertinent. </span></p><p>In conclusion, we note that especially recognition justice challenges those preparing and evaluating policy to <span>deliberate on justice impacts more deeply. Existing power positions and achieved privileges, the role of </span><span>minorities, and, for example, the rights of unborn generations and the Saami are all factors requiring attention. </span><span>Recognition justice offers the opportunity to recognize, for instance, those phases of procedures that require </span><span>improvements, for example to enable the participation of the abovementioned groups. Developing justice </span><span>evaluations is an important part of constructive conflict resolution, which will inevitably be needed in the future. </span><span>Cross-disciplinary research is important for advancing justice. The justice impacts of climate policy must be </span><span>monitored and they should be communicated in an open and accessible manner. </span></p>